Gameboy's End

Originally Posted by WraithTwo

Actually, it's probably more like they used that as an excuse for if the DS bombed.

However, they are enjoying sucess with it, so why progress the GB line?

- WraithTwo -

That's what I thought too. I don't think anyone but Nintendo really saw the DS as anything more than a successor to the Gameboy. All their "it's neither a handheld nor a console nor a successor or competitor to the Gameboy" talk was PR cover in the event that it didn't do well. About the only thing it doesn't do that a "traditional" Gameboy brand would is play all previous Gameboy games, since it only works with Advance games. I guess a Game Boy Color and a DS would be the best combo, since the only advantages the GBA had over the DS was it's size and price (both of which are things that the DS is improving on).

I'm actually glad to see support going to the DS, there really isn't anything that GBA did better once the DS and PSP were out. It was sort of the budget option like the PS1 was once the PS2 was out. They seemed to reach a bit of a dead end with the GBA not long after it was released, while the DS looks like it's options are expanding more and more with every passing day. It's nice to see the handheld market finally picking up again after being stagnant for nearly 10 years

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Eleo

I'm confused by this discussion. I thought the Nintendo DS was the successor to the Gameboy Advance? I'm totally baffled here. I didn't really expect a new gameboy; in my eyes the DS is the new Gameboy. Why would someone have to announce that there wouldn't be a new Gameboy.

The thing is, you and virtually every other consumer out there thought the same. To us, it's pretty obvious that the DS is more or less Nintendo's next generation handheld, like the GBA was to the GB. But Nintendo stated repeatedly that the DS was NOT a successor to the Gameboy series, and that it was "neither a handheld nor a console" and that it wasn't competing with the GBA. Well, we all know that's a load of bull, but in the event that the DS didn't do so well (they were especially cautious after the Virtual Boy), they could write it off as a failure without tarnishing the Gameboy name.

I think they were actually doing R&D on a new Gameboy, but it would've been pointless to release it. It WOULD have just ended up competing with the DS more than the PSP anyway, so all they'd have done is split their userbase between two devices that share many of the same traits anyway. The DS has enough features to last a while anyway, there isn't much more they could add to a handheld short of adding PSP quality graphics and media features. I have to say that the system's raw processing power is a bit low, seems like a small step below the PS1 as far as speed is concerned, but I guess it would've cost quite a bit more to add to a handheld.

As it so happens, I just bought a DS today. I must say I'm impressed, it's a spiffy little device. Quite a few cool features and options on it, and I'm looking forward to trying out more games on it that I was interested in but never was able to play until now like Tetris DS and Nintendogs. I just wish games didn't cost so much on it. Mario 64 DS is still $30 after nearly two years? Console games aren't that expensive after being out for that long! It's cheaper than PSP games, but it still seems like there should be some decent budget games by now.

There's nowhere I can't reach.